Advertisement
The Body: The Complete HIV/AIDS Resource
Follow Us Follow Us on Facebook Follow Us on Twitter Download Our App
Professionals >> Visit The Body PROThe Body en Espanol
Read Now: Expert Opinions on HIV Cure Research
   
Ask the Experts About

Safe Sex and HIV PreventionSafe Sex and HIV Prevention
           
Rollover images to visit our other forums!
Recent AnswersAsk a Question
  
  • Email Email
  • Glossary Glossary


36 hours with HIV
May 10, 2008

We just found out my husband has HIV. I was tested yesterday (results to come in a few days) and our 2 yr old son will be tested on Monday. I asked my Dr. what would happen if we chose not to use a condom when having sex and all he had to say was "don't do it". I really want to know what could happen and what the chances are of me contracting the virus. Would the chances be small if we didn't allow him to ejaculate while still inside?

Response from Dr. Frascino

Hello,

I'm sorry to hear about your husband's recent diagnosis.

You state: "I really want to know what could happen and what the chances are of me contracting the virus" (if you chooses to continue to have unprotected sex). I think you probably already know what the consequences of that decision could bring. You could and probably would contract HIV. The estimated per-act risk for acquiring HIV from unprotected receptive penile-vaginal sex with a partner confirmed to be HIV positive is 1 per 1,000 exposures. Does this mean you can have 999 nookies and not worry? No. Estimated statistical risks don't work that way. (See below.) Whether HIV transmission occurs with a particular exposure depends on many factors: viral strain, viral load, genetics, host immune integrity, local trauma, concurrent infections, etc. Certainly HIV transmission can occur with only a single exposure. And every time you have unprotected sex with an HIV-positive person you are playing a very dangerous game of sexual Russian roulette.

Would the chances for HIV transmission "be small" if you didn't allow him to ejaculate inside you? No, not necessarily. Certainly the overall risk would decrease somewhat, but we would not say the acquisition risk would be "small." I'd suggest you visit an HIV/AIDS ward at your local hospital or an AIDS hospice. The experience should be enlightening and eye-opening for you. I also encourage both you and your husband to read through the information in the archives of this forum related to magnetic couples, HIV sexual prevention, HIV sexual transmission and safer sexual techniques. In addition your husband should review the information in the chapter titled "Just Diagnosed," which can be easily access on The Body's homepage under "Quick Links."

Good luck on your upcoming HIV test. If negative, you'll need follow-up tests at the three- and six-month marks to confirm your negative HIV status.

Dr. Bob

HIV STATISTICS Sep 13, 2007

Doc,

Ive written to you many times over the past 3 years and youve answered several of my questions. Thank you! What I really need to know now is how accurate are your statistics about oral and anal sex. Is it really 1 per 10,000 for oral and 50 per 10,000 for anal? Im trying to explain to my negative partner exactly what our specific risk is. Neither one of us are math whiz-kids but this seems reasonably straight forward. He could expect to become infected once for every 10,000 blowjobs. Right?

Thanks Dr. Bob

Response from Dr. Frascino

Hello,

"He could expect to become infected once for every 10,000 blowjobs. Right?"??? Well actually no, that would be a wrong conclusion to draw from those statistics!!! I've covered this topic numerous times in the past, but I know HIV statistics can be a confusing topic. So even though this questions has now become a QTND (question that never dies) with an ATNC (Answer that never changes), I'll try to explain the limitations of these statistics once again.

The statistics I quoted are "estimated per-act risk statistics for acquisition of HIV by various exposure routes" published in a CDC document. These statistics were generated by combining a variety of published reports and did not control for many different potential variables that occur in different populations and among individuals. In other words, these statistics are primarily useful in determining relative risk, but not specific risk or actual risk for any individual. The reason for this is that any specific sexual coupling has a wide variety of variables to take into consideration when attempting to quantify specific HIV-transmission risk. These would include both viral factors, such as viral strain and viral load, as well as host factors, such as immune integrity, concurrent illnesses, circumcised/uncircumcised, genetic susceptibility, etc. Add to this nonspecific factors/extenuating circumstances, such as roughness of the encounter possibly causing trauma to mucous membranes, menstruation, etc., and perhaps you will begin to see the difficulty in providing transmission-risk statistics for any specific coupling. Also I should point out we cannot conduct prospective controlled epidemiological studies to try to account for theses variables, as that would be unethical. There are some published reports that address risk associated with specific sexual practices that control for some variables, but these studies usually have relatively small sample sizes and again are not applicable to everyone's specific situation. Another reference that I quote frequently is http://hivinsite.ucsf.edu/InSite?page=kb-07-02-02 (SAFER SEX METHODS). If you review the specific epidemiologic studies in this well referenced report, you'll get a better understanding of the complexity involved in these issues.

So why do I quote the statistics that I do? Good question! The main reason is that I am constantly barraged by anxious wrecks desperately trying to quantify their risk. I use the CDC statistics, because CDC is a very conservative organization and the numbers they generated are an amalgamation of many studies. They also standardized the relative risk to a common denominator ("10,000 exposures to an infected source"), which allows us to discuss relative risk. For instance, unprotected receptive anal sex is approximately 10 times more risky than unprotected insertive penile-vaginal sex, which in turn is approximately 10 times more risky than unprotected insertive oral sex.

I hope that this will help clarify the limitations of these estimated HIV-transmission risk statistics.

The bottom line is really much more concrete and easy to comprehend. If someone has placed himself or herself at risk for HIV, he or she should be HIV tested. Period. End of story.

I can just about hear all the paranoid panicky worried wells beginning to type away furiously, providing me with a blow-by-blow of their latest blow-by-blow and begging for me to quantify their specific risk. But unfortunately, unless the other person they were having sex with was me, I will not have enough specific detail to give them an accurate response. Hell, even if it were me, I still might not be able to give a completely accurate risk quantification!

Dr. Bob



Previous
How to deal with waiting for the results?
Next
HELP--At least some words of Wisdom

  
  • Email Email
  • Glossary Glossary

 Get Email Notifications When This Forum Updates or Subscribe With RSS


 
Advertisement



Q&A TERMS OF USE

This forum is designed for educational purposes only, and experts are not rendering medical, mental health, legal or other professional advice or services. If you have or suspect you may have a medical, mental health, legal or other problem that requires advice, consult your own caregiver, attorney or other qualified professional.

Experts appearing on this page are independent and are solely responsible for editing and fact-checking their material. Neither TheBody.com nor any advertiser is the publisher or speaker of posted visitors' questions or the experts' material.

Review our complete terms of use and copyright notice.

Powered by ExpertViewpoint

Advertisement